Search a substantial collection of case-specific reasoning, then narrow it by petition, field, legal issue, or date.
This expanded collection favors source-backed access over perfect automated classification. Fields, labels, summaries, and relevance may contain errors; records marked ‘broader context’ need extra care. Review the cited source before relying on any record. These appeals and motions do not show approval odds or denial rates, and are not legal advice or a prediction.
10,847 decisions /36,849 findings
Showing 9961–9970
EB-1AEB-1A · Leading / critical roleReservedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Leading / critical role
leading or critical role for distinguished organizations or establishments
What the decision said
AAO reserved this criterion because the Petitioner's failure on criteria (iv), (v), and (ix) was already dispositive of the appeal, making it unnecessary to address criterion (viii).
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO reserved this criterion because the Petitioner's failure on criteria (iv), (v), and (ix) was already dispositive of the appeal, making it unnecessary to address criterion (viii).
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-04_02_B2203; source_row=29705 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Final meritsNot addressedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Final merits
final merits determination
What the decision said
AAO found the Director's final merits analysis fatally deficient for failing to consider the totality of the evidence, applying incorrect standards regarding first authorship and demanding a specific type of citation evidence, and failing to adequately explain the basis for denial. The matter is remanded for a proper analysis.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
AAO found the Director's final merits analysis fatally deficient for failing to consider the totality of the evidence, applying incorrect standards regarding first authorship and demanding a specific type of citation evidence, and failing to adequately explain the basis for denial. The matter is remanded for a proper analysis.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-04_04_B2203; source_row=29716 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
EB-1AEB-1A · Published materialNot establishedAutomated extraction · broader context
Case facts
Other
Issue evaluated
EB-1A · Published material
published material about the individual
Why AAO was not persuaded
The Digital Druck interview is not 'about' the Petitioner beyond his name and title, and the record lacks evidence that Digital Druck is a professional or major trade publication. Other articles do not mention the Petitioner, and one article post-dates filing.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The Digital Druck interview is not 'about' the Petitioner beyond his name and title, and the record lacks evidence that Digital Druck is a professional or major trade publication. Other articles do not mention the Petitioner, and one article post-dates filing.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-04_01_B2203; source_row=29694 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
AAO remands for the Director to evaluate this criterion in the first instance, given that the Director failed to address it despite the Petitioner's specific claim.
Why this is useful
See how invitations, completed assignments, and the nature of judging were documented and weighed.
View full reasoning +
AAO remands for the Director to evaluate this criterion in the first instance, given that the Director failed to address it despite the Petitioner's specific claim.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-04_01_B2203; source_row=29695 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The petitioner has not submitted an official academic record showing a U.S. baccalaureate degree or foreign equivalent, and without such evidence no experience can qualify as post-baccalaureate. The regulation does not allow ten years of experience alone to substitute for the degree requirement in this immigrant classification context.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The petitioner has not submitted an official academic record showing a U.S. baccalaureate degree or foreign equivalent, and without such evidence no experience can qualify as post-baccalaureate. The regulation does not allow ten years of experience alone to substitute for the degree requirement in this immigrant classification context.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-03_01_B5203; source_row=29688 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c
The record fails to show that the petitioner meets any of the exceptional ability criteria, and the petitioner has not demonstrated that the prior AAO decision was in error on this point.
Why this is useful
Use the reasoning to identify the specific factual or documentary gap AAO considered material.
View full reasoning +
The record fails to show that the petitioner meets any of the exceptional ability criteria, and the petitioner has not demonstrated that the prior AAO decision was in error on this point.
Exact record locator: findings_long.parquet filename_stem=2022-08-03_01_B5203; source_row=29689 Revision: 081d2cac29dcadfec88fdd675d7a0c4294d72b3c